Western Railroad Discussion > Union lost crew consist arbitration

UTU lost the crew consist arbitration today. Which mean the carriers van now push for 1 man crews in national talks

https://smart-union.org/news/arbitrator-finds-that-section-6-bargaining-regarding-crew-consist-can-begin

Posted from Android



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/28/21 21:05 by renaissance.

Great...cant wait. What about all the "pre 1980" employees still working? I was under the impression that as long as they are still here...the railroad cannot implement it's 1 man crew policy. True...there are NOT many left....but there are still some who have no plans of retiring anytime soon. What about them....a buy out? BNSF tried that about 5 years ago...tried to buy them all out for $100K...after taxes it was around $75K....some took it...and some did not.

Hope I dont have to go back to sea...I thought those days were over with years ago.

That moratorium is out the door now that the railroad agreed to in the '80s and '90s. Arbitration is the equivalent of the US supreme Court

Posted from Android

Thanks PTC, thanks TO, thanks RCO... Every RRer wants to be the best at their craft and get even better with the inevitable introductions of new technology, while at the same time blindly cutting off our own fingers and toes in the process... Presenting to the Carriers countless examples of why they don't require the same overall workforce necessary to accomplish the equivalent level of work 10-20 years prior.

Survival of the fittest, and those with the most seniority. I've told fellow rails for several years, the tidal wave is already on the move and getting closer to crashing. One just hopes to stay ahead of the impending washout.


Mr. MRL ~ hoping 15+ is enough to stay afloat...

So there will be more accidents, and slower train movement times, and more guys in high rail trucks running around after trains.  The Brass will see this as a big plus.  The guys in the highrailers dont have the same contract protections as crew.
Welcome to the early 1900's.   Treat the workers like trash, so a few can put more million dollar paintings in their mansions.
Shortlines and regionals are the future of railroading, as the class1's  continue the push for unit trains from A to B only.

pdt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So there will be more accidents, and slower train
> movement times, and more guys in high rail trucks
> running around after trains.  The Brass will see
> this as a big plus.  The guys in the highrailers
> dont have the same contract protections as crew.
> Welcome to the early 1900's.   Treat the workers
> like trash, so a few can put more million dollar
> paintings in their mansions.
> Shortlines and regionals are the future of
> railroading, as the class1's  continue the push
> for unit trains from A to B only.

Please provide evidence that one man crews will result in more accidents 

In a buyout, the big burden shifts to railroad retirement plans.

By taking out a 55 year old six or seven years early, you reduce contributions TO the plan, and increase distributions FROM the plan.

Usually, there are fewer remaining participants putting money into the plan going forward.

Posted from Android

altoonafn Wrote:
-------------------------------------
> Please provide evidence that one man crews will
> result in more accidents 


Its COMMON SENSE...??!!!

This announcement is no surprise to me...

Posted from Android

A word of caution to the railfans who have
no skin in this game. 

No matter now much you think the one man
crew policy will increase the price of your railroad
stock shares or satisfy your "free market" ideals,
remember that there are REAL railroaders on here.

Their lives, not their hobby, will be effected.
Do you want a friendly wave or the middle finger
and a call to the DS concerning suspicious 
trespassers?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/29/21 06:11 by Englewood.

as i have said before, less people paying into r.r. retirement can't be good..........

66

I forgot to ask.  So if only half the people
are needed to operate each train, does that mean 
by keeping the current work force the railroads
plan to double the current number of trains they 
operate?  That way the jump in traffic expected 
after PSR begins bearing promised fruits will
be easily handled.

Waiting for some management stiff to actually 
make such a comment.

the next stop is to 0 active crew. the technology is there already there for suburban/urban mass transit. It's not a leap to think the mods necessary to move 20K ton 2 milers will be made. The only crew will be to monitor the computers on board. The future will be automated mainlines, and short lines and locals still with crews. eventually the whole railroad system will be automated including yards, locals and short lines. The trend is toward nationalization or one private railroad running everything.

Englewood Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I forgot to ask.  So if only half the people
> are needed to operate each train, does that
> mean 
> by keeping the current work force the railroads
> plan to double the current number of trains
> they 
> operate?  That way the jump in traffic
> expected 
> after PSR begins bearing promised fruits will
> be easily handled.
>
> Waiting for some management stiff to actually 
> make such a comment.


Lol...they can't handle the trains they have NOW. Trains sitting with no crews...and I don't mean at a yard either....

Posted from Android

zr1rob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> the next stop is to 0 active crew. the technology
> is there already there for suburban/urban mass
> transit. It's not a leap to think the mods
> necessary to move 20K ton 2 milers will be made.
> The only crew will be to monitor the computers on
> board. The future will be automated mainlines, and
> short lines and locals still with crews.
> eventually the whole railroad system will be
> automated including yards, locals and short lines.
> The trend is toward nationalization or one private
> railroad running everything.


I'm glad that I am having some coffee right now..!! I will refrain from responding to this..??!!??!! (Eyeroll)

Posted from Android



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/29/21 07:25 by ns1000.

ns1000 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> altoonafn Wrote:
> -------------------------------------
> > Please provide evidence that one man crews will
> > result in more accidents 
>
>
> Its COMMON SENSE...??!!!
>
> This announcement is no surprise to me...
>
> Posted from Android

Not so much - wouldn't less crews and less people be less potential injuries?

ns1000 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> altoonafn Wrote:
> -------------------------------------
> > Please provide evidence that one man crews will
> > result in more accidents 
>
>
> Its COMMON SENSE...??!!!
>
> This announcement is no surprise to me...
>
> Posted from Android
My view and am not employeed or ever have been by any RR is just like putting most airliners up with a single person up in the front end alone you have too many things which could cause work overload in an emergency that might take place for one to handle. Just an armchair RR person who has no skin in either games view.  Hope it never happens either as its about the same as saying self driving semi trucks are a good deal when self driving cars dont work has been already proven many times over. 

altoonafn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ns1000 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > altoonafn Wrote:
> > -------------------------------------
> > > Please provide evidence that one man crews
> will
> > > result in more accidents 
> >
> >
> > Its COMMON SENSE...??!!!
> >
> > This announcement is no surprise to me...
> >
> > Posted from Android
>
> Not so much - wouldn't less crews and less people
> be less potential injuries?


And what about the people that are STILL there??

1.) "Technology" is NOT a "fix all" for everything.

2). For those that may not know/forgot, working for a RR (particularly a Class 1) is extremely demanding..!! LONG hours, POOR sleeping schedules (more like NO sleeping schedules), poor management/MISMANAGEMENT, etc...need I go on...??!!

And the Carriers think they have a recruiting and retention problem now???  Lol

sphogger

For anybody who is concerned about 1 man crews effecting the railroad/commerce/community safety negatively, ask your US Senators to support the “Invest Act”. It passed in the US House recently and is currently in the US Senate for consideration. A 2 person crew mandate is part of the Invest Act.

And…what about State Law that requires a 2 man crew? Several states have written this into law.

Posted from iPhone

ns1000 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> altoonafn Wrote:
> -------------------------------------
> > Please provide evidence that one man crews will
> > result in more accidents 
>
>
> Its COMMON SENSE...??!!!
>
> This announcement is no surprise to me...
>
> Posted from Android

One employee in the cab might have a screw up with the train resulting in an accident you can read about in the newspaper. With two in the cab the second person might see the situation leading to an accident starting to unfold and suggest to the employee in control to take action to prevent the accident. You won't read about that in the newspaper.